The Panthers went into Atlanta last week and won 34-3, winning the NFC South and securing a home playoff game with a record of 7-8-1. After the game, Tony Dungy remarked that he believed the Panthers could go into Seattle and knock off the Seahawks the way they’re playing right now. That’s slightly hyperbolic, but I don’t disagree with his pro-Panthers sentiment. I was actually rooting for Seattle to lose and Arizona to win (even though I took Seattle -13 for a no confidence pick) early in those two games when they scenario was happening because I felt we could get a lot of line value with the Panthers as likely touchdown home underdogs to the Seahawks, who would fall to the 5th seed if they lost and Arizona won.

Unfortunately, Seattle did win and Arizona ended up losing anyway. Now Carolina hosts the Cardinals, which is a much easier matchup for them, but we’re not getting nearly as much line value with the Panthers as we would with them as touchdown home underdogs to Seattle. Still, the Panthers do seem like the right side here. The public is split, understanding that the Panthers are playing good football right now and understanding that the Cardinals are not the same team without Carson Palmer and even without Drew Stanton, but hesitant to lay a bunch of points with the Panthers. Despite the public’s hesitance and ambivalence, the line has moved from 4.5 to 6 and even 6.5 in some places over the past couple of days, suggesting heavy sharp action on the host.

I understand why the sharps are doing so and I agree with them. Aside from Seattle, Carolina is the hottest team in football coming into the playoffs. They’ve won 4 straight games and their rate of moving the chains differential when adjusted for strength of schedule is the 2nd best among playoff teams over the past 4 games, only trailing Seattle. In general, they’ve been great since the bye, only losing in Minnesota in a game that Carolina had a highly fluky two punts blocked and returned for touchdowns, the first time anything like that had happening in about 40 years.

Over those past 5 games since their bye, they’ve moved the chains at a 77.38% rate, as opposed to 61.98% for their opponents. The biggest difference is they’ve had Jonathan Stewart come back healthy and rush for 486 yards on 91 carries (5.34 YPA) and defensive coordinator Sean McDermott is finally once again getting the most out of his defense, despite massive personnel turnover from last season. Their schedule has been very easy over those past 5 games, as none of those 5 teams made the playoffs, but, as I mentioned earlier, even when adjusting for strength of schedule, they’re still a red hot team coming into the post-season. They’re outplaying these non-playoff teams far more than the average team does.

Besides, it’s not like Arizona is really playing like a playoff team right now. In terms of rate of moving the chains differential on the season, the Cardinals are the worst among teams who made the playoffs and even when you take strength of schedule into account, they’re only 0.01% ahead of Cincinnati for 11th out of 12 playoff teams. On the season, they moved the chains at a 69.70% rate, as opposed to 69.83% for their opponents, a differential of -0.13% that ranks 17th in the NFL.

Even Carolina is ranked 14th on the season, moving the chains at a 73.64% rate, as opposed to 72.50% for their opponents, a differential of 1.14%. Arizona’s 11-5 record has been buoyed by a 4-1 record in games decided by a touchdown or less and their +11 point differential is 2nd worst among qualifying playoff teams, only ahead of these Panthers and that doesn’t even tell the whole story. The Cardinals have benefitted from tough to sustain things like a 62.07% rate of recovering fumbles (best in the NFL), a +8 turnover margin, and a +4 return touchdown margin, while the Panthers recover just 50.00% of their fumbles, have just a -3 turnover margin, and a -2 return touchdown margin.

Also, while the Panthers are the 2nd hottest team coming into the playoffs, the Cardinals are the coldest, by a long-shot. Their defense has been above average over the past 4 games, as it has been all season, but their offense has moved the chains at a rate -4.67% worse than expected given their strength of schedule over the past 4 games, which makes sense, considering they’re down to their 3rd quarterback. On the season, they’ve moved the chains at a 73.58% rate in games started by Carson Palmer and a 67.03% rate in games started by other quarterbacks.

They’ve also been worse on the road than at home this season, particularly without Palmer, moving the chains at a 68.83% rate, as opposed to 69.53% for their opponents, a differential of -0.70%. That might not seem horrible, but in games started by quarterbacks other than Carson Palmer, they move the chains at a 64.02% rate on the road. Lindley had a decent performance in San Francisco last week against a banged up San Francisco defense, as he completed 23 of 39 for 316 yards, 2 touchdowns, and 3 interceptions, moving the chains at a 80.00% rate, which should give Arizona fans some hope, but this is still a quarterback that completes 50.8% of his passes for 4.98 YPA, 2 touchdowns, and 11 interceptions in his career over 264 attempts. Quarterbacks are 11-22 ATS since 2002 in their first post-season start anyway. Bruce Arians gets the most out of his quarterbacks, but I’m still going with the sharps and taking Carolina at 6 before this line gets any higher.

What is this? This is rate of moving the chains, which is my primary statistic for handicapping games. It holds the assumption that the goal of any team on any given 1st and 10 (or 1st and goal) is to move the chains (or score). In order to figure out how often teams meet that goal, I take first downs plus touchdowns and divide it by first downs plus touchdowns plus failures to move the chains (successes divided by attempts). Failures to move the chains include punts, turnovers, failed 4th downs, and field goal attempts (being forced to kick a field goal is a failure). I have this sorted by percent for (to evaluate offenses), percent against (to evaluate defenses), and differentials (to evaluate teams).

Offense

First Downs

Touchdowns

Field Goals

Punts

Turnovers

Failed 4ths

Safeties

1

GB

356

52

33

51

13

6

3

79.38%

2

NO

395

49

22

58

30

7

0

79.14%

3

PIT

379

43

32

62

21

5

0

77.86%

4

DAL

342

53

29

58

25

3

1

77.30%

5

DEN

360

55

29

69

20

7

0

76.85%

6

NE

361

47

37

67

13

6

0

76.84%

7

BAL

345

43

34

60

20

9

0

75.93%

8

MIA

361

39

37

59

23

12

0

75.33%

9

SEA

328

40

37

62

14

8

1

75.10%

10

IND

371

51

31

69

31

9

1

74.96%

11

ATL

330

39

32

67

23

8

1

73.80%

12

CAR

347

33

35

74

23

4

0

73.64%

13

SD

326

37

26

75

23

6

0

73.63%

14

KC

309

36

30

71

17

7

1

73.25%

15

CHI

322

38

16

72

29

15

0

73.17%

16

PHI

356

43

36

76

36

4

0

72.41%

17

NYG

336

43

26

81

28

11

0

72.19%

18

CIN

313

39

33

73

26

6

0

71.84%

19

DET

310

33

38

68

20

10

1

71.46%

20

SF

303

30

31

73

22

8

0

71.31%

21

WAS

318

33

27

78

31

12

0

70.34%

22

HOU

313

34

35

84

22

7

1

69.96%

23

ARZ

302

27

33

92

17

1

0

69.70%

24

MIN

288

29

35

76

20

6

2

69.52%

25

STL

288

31

30

81

27

6

0

68.90%

26

NYJ

289

27

39

79

24

7

1

67.81%

27

CLE

294

29

32

93

23

9

0

67.29%

28

TB

263

28

24

79

33

8

2

66.59%

29

BUF

273

30

38

86

23

8

2

65.87%

30

TEN

258

26

22

89

26

11

2

65.44%

31

JAX

271

24

26

96

26

12

2

64.55%

32

OAK

248

26

22

109

29

6

0

62.27%

Defense

First Downs

Touchdowns

Field Goals

Punts

Turnovers

Failed 4ths

Safeties

1

BUF

302

26

37

88

30

6

1

66.94%

2

SEA

277

25

24

83

24

6

1

68.64%

3

ARZ

300

31

32

78

25

8

0

69.83%

4

DEN

311

38

28

88

25

7

1

70.08%

5

STL

301

30

29

76

25

10

0

70.28%

6

IND

309

41

19

90

26

13

0

70.28%

7

KC

310

26

37

78

14

13

0

70.29%

8

BAL

311

30

36

76

22

9

1

70.31%

9

DET

310

31

23

82

27

9

1

70.60%

10

HOU

329

34

22

83

34

11

1

70.62%

11

CLE

348

35

34

86

29

7

1

70.93%

12

PHI

338

44

27

91

28

9

0

71.14%

13

NE

329

30

37

65

25

15

0

71.66%

14

CIN

337

34

32

75

26

9

3

71.90%

15

NYJ

300

41

32

81

13

4

1

72.25%

16

OAK

320

46

38

83

14

5

0

72.33%

17

SD

307

35

34

69

18

8

1

72.46%

18

CAR

309

39

28

72

26

6

0

72.50%

19

MIA

309

40

34

61

25

9

3

72.56%

20

SF

308

36

20

74

29

7

0

72.57%

21

NYG

326

40

31

75

26

6

0

72.62%

22

JAX

330

39

35

75

20

6

1

72.92%

23

MIN

321

36

31

76

19

5

0

73.16%

24

WAS

307

46

26

80

19

4

0

73.24%

25

PIT

314

39

32

68

21

4

1

73.70%

26

DAL

315

40

18

67

31

10

0

73.80%

27

GB

339

37

24

62

27

13

1

74.75%

28

TEN

357

45

39

73

16

6

1

74.86%

29

TB

353

43

39

64

25

4

0

75.00%

30

CHI

325

46

39

49

24

7

0

75.71%

31

ATL

358

41

38

56

28

4

0

76.00%

32

NO

345

43

32

63

17

4

2

76.68%

Differential

1

DEN

6.77%

2

SEA

6.47%

3

BAL

5.62%

4

NE

5.18%

5

IND

4.67%

6

GB

4.63%

7

PIT

4.16%

8

DAL

3.49%

9

KC

2.96%

10

MIA

2.77%

11

NO

2.46%

12

PHI

1.28%

13

SD

1.17%

14

CAR

1.14%

15

DET

0.86%

16

CIN

-0.06%

17

ARZ

-0.13%

18

NYG

-0.43%

19

HOU

-0.66%

20

BUF

-1.07%

21

SF

-1.27%

22

STL

-1.38%

23

ATL

-2.20%

24

CHI

-2.54%

25

WAS

-2.90%

26

CLE

-3.63%

27

MIN

-3.64%

28

NYJ

-4.43%

29

JAX

-8.37%

30

TB

-8.41%

31

TEN

-9.42%

32

OAK

-10.06%

Playoff Team Differential

1

DEN

6.77%

2

SEA

6.47%

3

BAL

5.62%

4

NE

5.18%

5

IND

4.67%

6

GB

4.63%

7

PIT

4.16%

8

DAL

3.49%

9

CAR

1.14%

10

DET

0.86%

11

CIN

-0.06%

12

ARZ

-0.13%

One thing I did differently this week is I calculated rate of moving the chains differential for the playoff teams adjusted for strength of schedule. I took the combined rate of moving the chains differential of each playoff team’s 16 opponents and compared it with the playoff team’s differential to figure out what portion of a team’s success and failure can be attributed to their schedule to give us a differential over average. I also did the same with offenses and defenses.

Playoff Team Schedule Adjusted Differential

1

DEN

6.92%

2

SEA

6.78%

3

NE

5.40%

4

BAL

4.94%

5

GB

4.32%

6

IND

3.87%

7

PIT

3.24%

8

DAL

2.77%

9

CAR

1.16%

10

DET

0.56%

11

ARZ

0.49%

12

CIN

0.48%

Playoff Team Schedule Adjusted Offense

1

GB

6.68%

2

DEN

5.77%

3

PIT

5.47%

4

NE

5.27%

5

DAL

4.99%

6

SEA

3.31%

7

BAL

3.00%

8

IND

2.69%

9

CAR

0.08%

10

CIN

-0.71%

11

DET

-1.91%

12

ARZ

-1.95%

Playoff Team Schedule Adjusted Defense

1

SEA

3.48%

2

DET

2.47%

3

ARZ

2.44%

4

BAL

1.94%

5

CIN

1.19%

6

IND

1.18%

7

DEN

1.15%

8

CAR

1.08%

9

NE

0.12%

10

DAL

-2.22%

11

PIT

-2.23%

12

GB

-2.36%

Another new thing I did this week is I broke out schedule adjusted differential into a team’s last 4 games and into a team’s last 8 weeks instead of just the whole season. The motivation for this is because I started the season 100-60 against the spread in the first 11 weeks of the season, but just 43-49 in the final 6 weeks. A similar thing happened over the last 2 seasons and I think part of it is because I’m putting too much stock into old data. This allows me to find out which teams are “hot” at the moment, something that might be masked by the season long data.

This line has shifted from 4 to 6 over the past week. Normally, I love fading significant line movements because they tend to be overreactions. Rate of moving the chains also says this line is too high, as the Cardinals rank 16th, moving the chains at a 69.52% rate, as opposed to 69.49% for their opponents, a differential of 0.03%, while the 49ers rank 20th, moving the chains at a 70.81% rate, as opposed to 72.15% for their opponents, a differential of -1.33% Their defense is also really hurting, losing Chris Borland, Eric Reid, and Ray McDonald for a variety of reasons in the last couple of weeks. However, this line might be warranted. The Cardinals were embarrassed at home by the Seahawks last week in a 35-6 loss that could have been worse if the Seahawks had made two makeable field goals. The Cardinals moved the chains at a mere 58.62% rate, as opposed to 80.00% for the Seahawks.

The 49ers aren’t as good as the Seahawks obviously and the Cardinals will be switching from Ryan Lindley to Logan Thomas at quarterback and I don’t think he could possibly be worse than Lindley, who, somehow in the modern age of football, has completed just 49.3% of his passes for an average of 4.44 YPA, 0 touchdowns, and 8 interceptions and has shown a stunning lack of accuracy and poor ball placement dating back to his San Diego State days. However, Thomas is a 4th round rookie and is just 1 of 8 in his career and, while that 1 completion went for 81 yards, it was on a dumpoff to a running back. The Cardinals only moved the chains at a 67.18% rate with Drew Stanton under center and figure to once again be even worse than that this week with Thomas under center. It’s hard to be confident in him, though I ultimately am going with the Cardinals.

The Broncos lost last week in Cincinnati, but they still rank 3rd in rate of moving the chains differential. Manning isn’t playing as good of football as he was last season and he’s coming off of one of the worst games of his career, but this is still a very complete team that runs the ball and plays defense better than they did last season. They move the chains at a 76.74% rate, as opposed to 71.10% for their opponents, a differential of 5.64%. Despite that, people seem to be jumping off the bandwagon. The public is actually on the Raiders here as 14 point underdogs, which is notable because the public always loses money in the long run and the public never takes big underdogs.

As they usually are, the public is wrong here. This line is way too low. The Raiders, despite some recent success, still stink, moving the chains at a 63.07% rate, as opposed to 72.01% for their opponents, a differential of -8.94% that is still the league’s worst. They’ve been even worse away from Oakland, moving the chains at a 57.85% rate, as opposed to 70.04% for their opponents, a differential of 12.19% in 8 games, including a neutral site “home game” in London week 4 against the Dolphins.

The Raiders have won three straight home games in big upset fashion, which is part of why the public likes them here, but they’ve still had issues on the road recently. Besides, teams are 65-85 ATS off of home victories as 6+ point underdogs. On the other side, the Broncos have had no problem taking care of bad teams in the Peyton Manning era, going 16-10 ATS as home favorites, including 6-3 ATS as home favorites of 10 or more. The only reason this isn’t a bigger play is because the Raiders have been a sneaky good ATS team this season, going 8-7 ATS, including road covers against Seattle, New England, and San Diego. They’re also 4-2 ATS in their last 6, though just 1-2 ATS on the road.

I’m torn on this one. On one hand, this line has shifted from 8 to 6 over the past week. I love fading significant line movements as they’re often overreactions. This line movement could very well be an overreaction. While the Redskins beat the Eagles last week, they could have lost and lost fairly easily if not for two Philadelphia missed field goals, both of which were makeable, and a couple 50/50 balls to DeSean Jackson that went their way. They lost the first down battle 30-21 in that one and the Eagles moved the chains at an 82.50% rate, as opposed to 77.42% for the Redskins. Teams are 65-85 ATS off of a win as 6+ point home underdogs since 1989 anyway, likely because those types of upset victories usually are fluky and precede significant line movements.

The Cowboys, meanwhile, have been significantly better on the road this season, going 7-0, as opposed to 4-4 at home. They’ve moved the chains at a 78.13% rate on the road, as opposed to 73.46% for their opponents, a differential of 4.67%. At home, they move the chains at a 76.86% rate, as opposed to 74.79% for their opponents, a differential of 2.07%. This is nothing new for them are they are 22-16 ATS on the road since 2010, as opposed to 14-26 ATS at home.

On the other hand, the Redskins have been better than their record all season. Last week was a fluky win, but they’ve had some fluky losses and also some close losses that could have gone either way. Even when you take into account that the Cowboys have been better on the road and the line movement, we’re still getting some line value with the Redskins. The Redskins move the chains at a 70.75% rate on the season, as opposed to 73.11% for their opponents, a differential of -2.36% that ranks 25th in the NFL, significantly better than their record would suggest. The Cowboys also don’t have a ton to play for here as they’re locked into the #3 seed unless both Seattle and Arizona lose so they could be caught looking forward off of such a big win last week. The line movement might have more to do with that than anything. At the end of the day, I’m going with the Redskins and fading the public, but I wouldn’t wager a cent on it.